Nice recap but golly Terry, I've heard so many complaints on this forum about AP's Poly being crappy and so unpredictable - though mostly from someone calling themselves "Horseface" or something like that. The bottom line is that Poly is just another surface for Capper's to include in their analysis. It appears to be safer for the contestants and I like that.

Nice recap but golly Terry, I've heard so many complaints on this forum about AP's Poly being crappy and so unpredictable - though mostly from someone calling themselves "Horseface" or something like that. The bottom line is that Poly is just another surface for Capper's to include in their analysis. It appears to be safer for the contestants and I like that.

Nice recap but golly Terry, I've heard so many complaints on this forum about AP's Poly being crappy and so unpredictable - though mostly from someone calling themselves "Horseface" or something like that. The bottom line is that Poly is just another surface for Capper's to include in their analysis. It appears to be safer for the contestants and I like that.

We'll just follow along each day until the end of the meet and see what we see.

If anyone can deduce from those stats any meaningful difference between the public's performance on poly, turf, or dirt, I'd sure like to read it. And if the public does pretty much just as well no matter what the surface, then is the complaint of "random unpredictability" (or whatever) as reported an actual phenomenon, or just a problem the complainant is having? Food for thought.

Nice recap but golly Terry, I've heard so many complaints on this forum about AP's Poly being crappy and so unpredictable - though mostly from someone calling themselves "Horseface"

You two should get a room at Facetious Suites, and crack each other up all night long.

If you were paying attention -- a skill in drastically short supply on the Forum -- you would know that I'm not a fan of ANY Polytrack surface: it simply kills off the brilliant speed horses, which alters the natural race shape enough to make a mess of things. If AP gets mentioned more, I attribute that to this being a Chicago-oriented forum.

The bottom line is that Poly is just another surface for Capper's to include in their analysis. It appears to be safer for the contestants and I like that.

No, the bottom line is: screw Polytrack. It's a piece of shit surface, and I ain't betting it.

I can go the rest of my life without betting a Polytrack race, and not miss a thing: the vast majority of the best horses in the world will still do their best work on turf and conventional dirt tracks. You guys that like fake tracks, fake food, and fake tits -- have at it. More for you.

If anyone can deduce from those stats any meaningful difference between the public's performance on poly, turf, or dirt, I'd sure like to read it. And if the public does pretty much just as well no matter what the surface, then is the complaint of "random unpredictability" (or whatever) as reported an actual phenomenon, or just a problem the complainant is having? Food for thought.

What, are you a moron?

You think I want to act like the betting public, Terry?

Why would ANYONE do that? As a group, the public is a LOSER -- and a GUARANTEED loser, at that.

You retorts on this topic...your use of statistics to try to make me look foolish, or like I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, this has got to be about the worst effort I've ever seen...or maybe the most simpleton in nature.

It does occur to me, though, that you have so little invested in the game these days that winning or losing only means a couple of bucks either way, to you. And if you don't like me bringing this up, too f'n bad, but it IS relevant: you can make as many pithy statements as you like about Polytrack, because it doesn't affect your bottom line if you only play 10 days a year.

Why would ANYONE do that? As a group, the public is a LOSER -- and a GUARANTEED loser, at that.

The issue here is whether or not polytrack is totally random and unpredictable, as you claim. Not what you want to bet.

Quote

You retorts on this topic...your use of statistics to try to make me look foolish, or like I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, this has got to be about the worst effort I've ever seen...or maybe the most simpleton in nature.

According to these stats, the general public has no more difficulty at all in figuring out how to bet on poly than they do on turf or dirt, so I'd say it's the person who claimed that poly is totally unpredictable that made you look foolish.

No, the bottom line is: screw Polytrack. It's a piece of shit surface, and I ain't betting it.

I can go the rest of my life without betting a Polytrack race, and not miss a thing: the vast majority of the best horses in the world will still do their best work on turf and conventional dirt tracks. You guys that like fake tracks, fake food, and fake tits -- have at it. More for you.

This sounds like a typical loser's lament to me. It's no crime to admit you aren't successful wagering on All Weather surfaces HV. We get it - you think AW is crap. Just do what you're doing - ignore them just as I ignore wagering on certain tracks that I don't seem to be able to beat. From my viewpoint, AW is a good complement to turf racing and it appears to be safer than dirt for horses. That appeals to me.

This is the same "John Q." that just loves McDonalds and Budweiser and GM cars...right?

The same "John Q." that, as a group, loses 20 cents out of EVERY dollar they bet...right?

Yeah, good idea, Terry: let's use ol' John Q. to measure what he best represents: mediocrity.

Utterly irrelevant. The question is not what beer people drink, but simply whether or not poly is random/unpredictable/whatever, like has been repeatedly claimed. A claim has been made and it is being tested against reality.

Utterly irrelevant. The question is not what beer people drink, but simply whether or not poly is random/unpredictable/whatever, like has been repeatedly claimed. A claim has been made and it is being tested against reality.

Yes, but your measuring stick sucks. The public? Might as well use the "chicken bones" you claim us Sheets users use.

Conclusion: Once again, that much maligned loser John Q. Public did a pretty exemplary job of selecting the correct contenders to win these all-weather races, with the possible exception of the 9th, which I won't even bother to look up - it could not be considered in any way random since the winner was trained by HV's go-to auto-bet guy on all surfaces, Roger Bruggemann.